Ubuntu vs Kubuntu

Alan Pater alan.pater at gmail.com
Sat Jan 20 05:39:42 UTC 2007

I find that Gnome is better for a new user, it is different enough
from the MS Windows look and feel that people don't expect to do
things exactly the same as they do when using MS Windows. And the
focus on usability within Gnome makes it easy to learn.

I look at KDE every once in while (you can install both on a default
Ubuntu system), but find that I prefer the Gnome Keep-it-Simple look
and feel. KDE has too many options and switches and buttons for me.
Great if you like to spend a lot of time configuring things though.

Plus, Ubuntu Gnome has a much nicer colour scheme then Kubuntu's KDE. :-)

On 1/19/07, G Williams Webmaster Ubuntuvoice.com <info at ubuntuvoice.com> wrote:
> Kde does look more attractive to the newbie.   It looks for some reason
> a bit more like Windows than Gnome does,   at least out of the box and
> there are things about it that appear to be a better deal.  I think its
> the fonts and the layouts.
> Lately though with a purpose in mind I have found Gnome to have as much
> eye candy (go ahead make it look like Windows)  but more under the hood
> when it comes to applications.   KDE comes with a lot of stuff,  but as
> far as stability goes Ubuntu at least is not a distribution that
> supports it perhaps like Knoppix does.    For what I was running it
> for,  it just does not remain stable and the multimedia applications I
> use Linux for now just aren't anything to write home about in KDE.
> I suppose I am somewhat of a qualified opinion.   Tried running edgy,
> tried running xubuntu,   tried this and that.   Dapper is stable and
> ubuntu has Gnome not KDE.
> I know how you feel having run everything from Redhat to Mandrake (not
> Mandriva)  to Gentoo,   to Caldera ( I know ewww those guys!)  looking
> for something that felt like home.
> Best advice decide whether you want to learn a *new* OS,  get the stable
> version,   and get the distro (if its linux)  that suits your needs.
> The developers always have a preference and its usually for what works
> and its really their choice as to what they want to work on,   so its
> not your wish list,  its theirs.
> It would mean your either going to develop your own flavour and make it
> stable or head back to the familiar windows and pay pay pay the price.
> Its never comfortable to learn or adopt something new.   The final and
> best piece of advice I can give is give it time and make sure you have a
> copy around of something that works for you.
> I didn't and probably to some extent,   still don't like the feel of
> Gnome that much.   However,   having hit my head against the wall enough
> times,  the trade off is fine with me.   I will just deal with
> aesthetics by sucking it up or  making it into something that doesn't suck.
> Hope it helps.
> Pay Wahun wrote:
> > I have read a lot into Kubuntu and Ubuntu, (KDE / GNONE). I was
> > however wondering which of these two platforms is worth a long-term
> > commitment. I think Kubuntu is easier to work with than Ubuntu for a
> > newbie like me. But too much emphasis is placed on Ubuntu, so much
> > that I wonder if Canonical has any long-term commitment towards
> > Kubuntu. Even the recently printed official Ubuntu book pays a lip
> > service towards Kubuntu (KDE) OS and reading from this book, I wonder
> > what the future holds for   Kubuntu - and would it be better for me to
> > focus on U instaed of KU?. What do you think? Would appreciate any
> > advice.
> --
> ubuntu-ca mailing list
> ubuntu-ca at lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-ca

More information about the ubuntu-ca mailing list